End of Year Awards 2025

This might be a controversial opinion to some but I think that 2025 has been a good year for cinema. Not the best by any means but not the worst. I personally didn’t struggle putting my Top 10 Film list together. There have been a worrying number of high profile losses but there have been plenty. This year saw Frankenstein become the most successful film in these awards. Sinners was the best film of the year but Frankenstein was the big winner with 6 wins compared to Sinners 3.

Best Picture - Sinners

Best Director - Ryan Coogler (Sinners)

Best Leading Actor - Michael B. Jordan (Sinners)

Best Supporting Actor - Sean Penn (One Battle After Another)

Best Leading Actress - Sally Watkins (Bring Her Back)

Best Supporting Actress - Chase Infiniti (One Battle After Another)

Best British Picture - 28 Years Later

Best Picture Not in the English Language - An Unfinished Film

Best Animated Picture - Zootopia 2

Best Documentary - Ocean with David Attenborough

Best Family Picture - Lilo & Stitch

Best Cinematography - Dan Lausstsen (Frankenstein)

Best Screenplay - Guillermo Del Toro (Frankenstein)

Best Production Design - Tamara Deverell (Frankenstein)

Best Score - Alexandre Desplat (Frankenstein)

Best Visual/Special Effects - David Seager, Abishek Nair Vincent Papix, Jeff Caprogreco, Mike Beaulieu, John Alvarado, Alexandra Greene, Tomasz Wachnik & Alice Cicchetti (TRON: Ares)

Best Make-Up & Hair - Jordan Samuel, Mike Hill & Cliona Furey (Frankenstein)

Best Costume Design - Kate Hawley (Frankenstein)

Here are my top 10

Sinners

Frankenstein

Weapons

Nuremberg

One Battle After Another

Warfare

Bring Her Back

Springsteen: Deliver Me from Nowhere

28 Years Later

Thunderbolts*

Big Winners

6 - Frankenstein

3 - Sinners

2 - One Battle After Another

Avatar: Fire and Ash (2025)

You know when you can tell that you are gonna hate something and still go through with it out of some morbid curiosity. Well that happened to me when I sat down to watch the third Avatar film. The first was ok and the second one was quite the endurance challenge and there was nothing that made me think it was going to be a masterpiece and one of the big positives of the film is that I wasnt disappointed.

The film features Oona Chaplin and there were large chunks of the movie where I was thinking about Charlie and how her family has gone form him being the pioneer of silent cinema to this nonsense. There seemed to be something good about her character in terms of being a good villain but it gets bogged down but the ‘plot’. She does meet her demise so its clear that she will return. If the film had been about that then the film would have worked better but they decided to chuck in the thing about Spider being sent away because he is in danger to not being able to breathe the air but when he is able to they still want to send him away. There is a lot of family stuff which just isn’t very interesting and I could have done without. Oh and there is the conflicted father-son thing going on between Quaritch and Spider that I didn’t care about because it seemed to be there to…….. nope I got nothing there.

The main problem is that the more James Cameron loves this world then the more we have to put up with before the ‘plot’ kicks in. In the previous film it was about an hour before we started to get the plot, in this one its closer to 90 minutes. The only time that I ever care about what was going on was during the battle in the final 40-45 minutes. Like most people in the screening I was at, I had to go for a toilet break and when I got up a group of people were talking and when I came back about 4 minutes later they will still in the same conversation. Clearly nobody told Cameron about pacing because I am guessing that the conversation they were having could have been cut in half.

The obvious plus point is the look of the film. James Cameron has done a great job building this world and making it look spectacular which is which explains why these films are so long. The budget was a reported $400 million and it shows because nothing about this film seems cheap and the time and care has been put into making this film look spectacular.

I think if you ‘get it then the film will be a much more enjoyable experience but if like me you dont then it will be an endurance. I couldn’t honestly say that this is the worst film of the year or even in the bottom 10 but it is a slog of a film to sit through and Cameron seems to be threatening more so hopefully he will learn the lesson that longer running times do not equate to good quality. Sometimes shorter films are more enjoyable. The first one was 162 minutes, the second was 192 minutes and this was 198 minutes so that is just over 9 hours in total and if Cameron could get the next ones down to the run time of the first one then I would have a much better experience. Three films in and I am still not convinced that this franchise is any good.

The Shining (1980)

Wth the Shining celebrating its 45th Anniversary, it felt like a great opportunity to watch this classic at the cinema. There is a documentary which serves as a very good companion piece exploring all the theories associated with this film which range from good to downright ridiculous. The movie sees Jack Nicholson play Jack Torrance who takes on a job as a caretaker of the Overlook Hotel during the winter months so that he can write his novel. Things seem to go strange quite quickly though and it becomes a fight between Jack and Wendy.

As the movie progresses things get very bleak and one of the things that I do like about this film is that it’s very well shot. The claustrophobic feel of the latter half of the film adds an extra layer of tension to what was already a tense film. It really doesnt take long for the strange vibe to start as it starts from the flying over the lake then there are the continuous shot of following Danny around on his little bike. 

In the past I would have said that I could have done without Wendy because even though she’s suppose to be in terror at what her husband has turned into and I just found myself being slightly bored by her. As the years and rewatches have gone by I still find portions of Shelley Duvall’s acting to be a little ropey but overall I have changed my opinion of her performance. Nicholson is in fine form here and pretty much steals the film. Every time he was on screen he was in complete control and every time he wasn’t on screen, I took this as an opportunity to take a mental breather and wait for the next time and that was probably a wise thing to do. The infamous ‘here’s Johnny’ line was exactly as good every single time I hear it. There is a reason why it's iconic and it's because it’s truly terrifying.

As a movie, I thought that it was brilliant. One of the best horror films ever made because no matter how many times I have seen this film I am totally engaged with what is happening. It’s very tense and very well acted and also I liked the story. This was the first time that I saw it at the cinema and the big screen is the perfect place and the version I saw was apparently the American cut because there were a couple of things that were new such as the extended doctor scene with Wendy and the shot of the skeletons sitting in the reception area at the hotel. There are probably more but they dont come to mind. If you ever get the chance to see this film on the big screen then you should because its makes the film even better.

Giant (2025)

 Giant was a mystery screening (not due out until 9th January) which tells the story of Brendan Ingle (played by Pierce Brosnan) as he trains Prince Nadeem Hamed (Amir El-Mary) from a seven year old boy to being world champion. Growing up in the UK during the 90’s I knew who Prince Nadeem Hamed was but its been many many years since he was in the public eye so I knew next to nothing about him. The main focus of the film is Brendan. It’s his boxing club that we see Naz become the world champion of boxing, its his home life we see from time to time as there is very little of Naz’s homelife when he was growing up and the racial abuse that he and his family suffer.

The film is a Die Another Day reunion because we have Pierce Brosnan and Toby Stephens with Stephens playing Frank Warren and whilst Stephens doesnt look like Warren. I suppose those outside the UK or people who don’t follow boxing probably won’t notice or even care. Brosnan is great in this as he usually is in most things he is in and I thought that Amir El-Masry was good as the older Naz but I thought that Ali Saleh was very good as the 12 year old Naz and a part of me wanted there to be more of him in the film although I understand that the story needed to move along. 

The boxing scenes are fine but don’t have the impact that the ones in the Creed films have. Also when we see the stadium shots or what is suppose to pass for Madison Square Garden then it does come across as a little cheap because there are not shots to suggest we are were the film says we are.

There is a scene at the end where Brendan and Naz reconcile and it feels like this is the films attempt to give us a satisfying ending because the real ending is that they never reconciled which is definitely a sad ending but i suppose if you are telling a true story then you have to follow the less Hollywood-type ending. The film tries to paint Brendan as this likeable guy and he is to a point but he is portrayed as a naive indi  early on he arranges a business deal with a child and treats this like a gentlemen’s agreement and expecting it to be honoured and I couldn’t figure out whether he was just riding his luck or he genuinely believed this would be honoured. There is also something sus about arranging a business deal with a child, there is something that in another film would have made them a baddie. 

This is the third film this year about a real life fighting person that I didn’t know a huge amount about. This is more like Christy and less like The Smashing Machine in the sense that they took a individual that I didn’t know anything about and make their story interesting. I would say that it’s more of a enjoyable watch than Christy although that film does have a better plot. It will be worth your time especially if you are a boxing fan.

The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993)

The Nightmare Before Christmas was one of my earliest experiences of going to the cinema. I remember seeing this with my brother back in 1993. I remember seeing it after Christmas and it had been snowing as we were waiting for our dad to pick us up. The story sees Jack decide that he wants to make Christmas more spooky and decides to traumatise children as much as possible before discovering the error of his ways. The character of Jack is quite good. He is seen as a hero but the repetitiveness of just working on Halloween gets to him in a way that repetitive working situations get to us all and his decision to try and steal Christmas doesn't come across as mean or greedy but something that might work quite well. 

The animation is still amazing 32 years after I first saw it. The screening I was at was a 3D one and I am not entirely sure that the film needed to be in 3D. They had applied the process to most of the film as every so often I took my 3D glasses off and things were blurry but I don't think that 3D added anything to the film. The screening was I would say 80% full which for 10:20 on a Sunday morning was very surprising. There were plenty of children in and apart from the occasional cry, the children were well behaved and better behaved than some adults I have come across in screenings this year. They seemed to be enjoying the film and its nice to know that even films over 30 years old have the power to keep young people’s attention.

Something that I have a new appreciation for is the music. This year has seen me take a keener interest in music scores and songs and the songs in this film are great. ‘This is Halloween’ is my favourite but all the songs are fun. This was the era where Tim Burton and Danny Elfman were at their peak creative wise and they do what is expected in a musical and that is make the songs memorable and they achieve this. 

This is a great film in my opinion. I have always been a fan but there was something about seeing it at the cinema that made this a five star film for me. It might not be directed by Tim Burton but it is definitely a Tim Burton film. This was a Tim Burton film where the style works with the substance. The aesthetics scream Tim Burton and this along with Edward Scissorhands, Batman and Beetlejuice showed how good Burton was. The animation is still stunning after 32 years, the songs are memorable and the story manages to do a lot in just 70 minutes or so. This is a film that I love not just for nostalgia reasons but for the fact that it is a great Christmas film.  

Five Nights at Freddy's 2 (2025)

So the first one made enough money so that we were inevitably going to get a sequel. I still don't know as much about the games as I did when the first one came out. The set up is that the original Fazbar saw a young girl was murdered in 1982 and her spirit got into a marionette and she has developed a hatred of parents because when the girl tried to get adults attention they just dismissed her.The story then moves back to ‘present day’ where Mike and Abby are trying to move on after the events of the first film with Abby missing her ‘friends’.  

This is nowhere near as good as the first one. I think that comes across as Five Nights at Freddy’s 2 Part 1 because this doesn't feel like it has got a satisfactory conclusion. The line about them coming back suggests we are getting a third film and then Vanessa getting possessed shows that her story isn’t over. Other issues with the film include the ‘climax’ where Mike uses the music box to release Abby from the marionette’s power seemed a bit underwhelming as when this sort of thing happens elsewhere it would be a bigger deal and here it seems to end in about 4 seconds. They also make a big deal out of Skeet Ulrich being in the film with his connection to the Scream films and would it be a possible reunion with Matthew Lillard but sadly that didn’t happen because of Ulrich’s blink and you miss is cameo and also the fact that Lillard is in about three scenes and they are all flashbacks. Although in the mid-credits scene his costume from the first one is seen and apparently there was more post credits stuff which suggests that Ulrich might feature more in the next one.

There are some good things about this film. I think that Piper Rubio is quite likeable as Abby and she manages to liking and being friends with the killer robots seem like a sensible thing. It just would be nice if she were given more to do because I found Abby more of an interesting character than Vanessa. Wayne Knight was great as Mr. Berg who is a teacher that doesn't seem to like Abby for some reason but his death is quite good. Mckenna Grace is also great in her brief appearance as the presenter of a paranormal series which is starting to appear cliched but she makes the most of her brief time. 

This hasn’t been advertised as the first part of a trilogy or a two parter so things feel like they are starting things off just to be resolved in another film. It’s a bit like Halloween Kills and Halloween Ends. I’m getting a bit fed up with films spilling over into more than its current entry. Definitely a step down from the first one.

Christy (2025)

I knew pretty much nothing about this film before I decided to go and see this film. The story tells the story of Christy (Sydney Sweeney) as she becomes the poster child for women’s boxing. As the film progresses it becomes more about the abusive relationship between Christy and Jim.

The film doesn't pull any punches. There are a couple of scenes where Christy suffers domestic violence. They all come after Christy takes a dig at Jim and he retaliates. The first time we don't see what happens although it's left to our imagination. This can often be just as impactful as if we did see it. This felt like the calm before the storm as the really tough part comes when Jim stabs Christy, shoots her and then goes and has a shower is a tough one to watch. Its partly because Sweeney looks helpless as she is bleeding to death, choking on her own blood with a bit of flesh hanging from her calf but also that Ben Foster is just walking around almost not sure what to do next. Walking in and out of each room like he’s just forgotten what he went in for. It’s rather underplayed but quite powerful and then it's followed by Christy getting up and managing to get help. 

Sydney Sweeney is very good. It’s clear that she does all the boxing stuff herself and do you really sympathise with her as the relationship with Jim goes to a dark place. I know some people will take against this purely because of the jean advert she did and because she’s a registered republican but that has absolutely nothing to do with the role. As Christy she is a confident if at times flawed person who trash talks people more out of trying to convince herself of her abilities as opposed to convincing others. Ben Foster plays Jim and is really good as playing such a vile and abusive person. He almost steals the show because of how horrible he is. From the very moment that we see him there is something to dislike about him and its curious to see what Christy likes about him apart from the promises that he makes about helping her career. I liked his last scene where he is sitting in court as Christy gives her speech and he looks pathetic and you cant help but think that this is the least he deserves.

Katy O’Brien has a habit of turning up in a film and being great in it. Since Love Lies Bleeding she shows she can do whatever role she plays. As Lisa, she starts off as someone who is an opponent of Christy’s and by the end of the film becomes her wife. It’s quite the progression for her. She is underused in this film but what we do get in this film is still great to see. 

Christy was a very good film that does what The Smashing Machine doesn't and tells a story about someone that may not be known to many people and makes it interesting. It has great performances and should be seen by as many people as possible. The film might struggle to find an audience and its not because its lead star is a registered republican but because of the domestic violence aspect of the story. If you can get through the tough subject matter then this film is worth your time. At over two hours it doesnt outstay its welcome and I think is perfectly paced with an upbeat ending. One of the best surprises of the year.

Zootopia 2 (2025)

Sometimes its worth asking if a film needs a sequel and most of the time its a no. This is definitely a no, mainly because the first film has been 9 years and wasn't terrible but neither was it the most exciting animated film I have ever seen. However here we are and the film takes place shortly after the first film and sees Judy and Nick track down a snake who it turns out is after proof that his family invented a machine that allows different animals to live in the city but the piece of paper that says this is hidden and they have to find it before some cats get to it cause they are the ones who are claiming……. Oh it doesn't really matter 

The main issue with the film is that it feels like they have to find the thing to get to the thing to get to the other thing and things feel like they are happening because the film has to exist instead of just feeling like they happen naturally and that the film is here because it was a good story as opposed to the fact that the first one must have made enough money. 

The animation is quite good and it would be nice to spend time in this world but with a less convoluted story. I am not the target audience so I am sure that there are some references that younger people would get but I did quite like the shining reference.

Overall I thought that Zootopia 2 (or Zootropolis as it seems to be known elsewhere for some reason) was fine for what it was. Again I’m not sure if the world was crying out for a sequel to a film that was ok to begin with. I dont know if there will be a third but that will only work if they feel that there is a story to tell because despite the chalk and cheese type characters of Judy and Nick, there needs to be something substantial to make it worth people’s time and  money to go to the cinema otherwise it would be a soulless cashgrab exercise to get lost in the mix on Disney+.